<sup>18</sup>F-4FMFES and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT in ER+ endometrial carcinomas: preliminary report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the preliminary results of a phase II clinical trial investigating the use of the Estrogen Receptor (ER) targeting PET tracer 4-fluoro-11β-methoxy-16α-[18F]fluoroestradiol (18F-4FMFES) and [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG)-PET in endometrial cancers will be accounted. In parallel, non-invasive interventions will be attempted to slow down progression of 18F-4FMFES metabolites in the intestines to reduce abdominal background. Methods: In an ongoing study, 25 patients that received prior pathological confirmation of an ER+ endometrial cancer or endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia agreed to participate to the ongoing clinical trial. Patients were scheduled for 18F-FDG and 18F-4FMFES PET/CT imaging in random order and within 2 weeks. Patients were administered either 4 mg loperamide per os before 18F-4FMFES tracer injection or repeated intravenous injection of 20 mg hyoscine N-butylbromide during 18F-4FMFES-PET/CT. Regions-of-interest (ROIs) covering the whole abdomen and excluding the liver, bladder and uterus were drawn for the 18F-4FMFES-PET images, and a threshold of SUV > 4 was applied. The volume of the resulting region was compared between the different interventions to estimate the extent of the intestinal background. Results: Repeated injection of hyoscine N-butylbromide substantially reduced the intestinal background volume, whereas loperamide had a significant but moderate effect. 18F-4FMFES tumor uptake ranged between SUVmax 3.0 and 14.4 (9.4 ± 3.2), whereas 18F-FDG uptake spreaded between SUVmax 0 and 22.0 (7.5 ± 5.1). Tumor-to-background ratio were significantly higher for 18F-4FMFES (16.4 ± 5.4) than for 18F-FDG (7.4 ± 4.6). Significant differences were observed between grade 1 and higher-grade tumors concerning 18F-4FMFES uptake and contrast. 18F-FDG uptake, and the 18F-FDG/18F-4FMFES uptake ratio. Conclusion: It is possible to improve 18F-4FMFES abdominal background using hyoscine N-butylbromide. Both 18F-FDG and 18F-4FMFES-PET are suitable for detection of ER+ endometrial cancers, although 18F-4FMFES yielded a better tumor contrast than 18F-FDG.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".